Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
May 21, 2019, 04:26:34 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
 1 
 on: Today at 03:47:42 AM 
Started by TheLurker - Last post by abl
Thinking back a considerable number of years to when I did this sort of thing, I seem to remember that if it's climbing too steeply and/or looping off the tow then the tow-hook is too far back. If you have the hook far enough forward, it won't climb very much at all and will just accelerate in a more-or-less a straight line.

My suggestion would be to try the nosewheel hook, but be prepared to install another one slightly further forward than half-way between that and the current position.

 2 
 on: Today at 03:32:43 AM 
Started by TheLurker - Last post by TheLurker
Quote from: Jack Plane
Re the launch, might I venture to suggest that - in the interests of scale fidelity - you acquire a DC3 or similar and conduct a proper aero-tow?

I am seriously considering mounting the hook just in front of the nosewheel.  This would be near scale for an AS 58, TL472 was a 58, which was towed from the nosewheel leg. Smiley

 3 
 on: Today at 03:18:33 AM 
Started by TheLurker - Last post by Jack Plane

... and don't forget to tip the waitress.  Cheesy


I clocked her quite early on in fact...  Wink

A most excellent entertainment indeed dear Lurk.

Re the launch, might I venture to suggest that - in the interests of scale fidelity - you acquire a DC3 or similar and conduct a proper aero-tow?

 4 
 on: Today at 03:12:03 AM 
Started by danmellor - Last post by Jack Plane

...and the other will be rubber. A lot of rubber. Maybe even two lots of rubber...!


I didn't know that the Pushmi-Pullyu was ever kitted...?   Wink

My KS entry - rubber this time - is already made, has two wings, a span of 13" and is light-blue with black crosses.


 5 
 on: Today at 03:08:24 AM 
Started by stovebolt - Last post by dputt7
   Did anyone have any luck contacting anyone regarding the sale of this book. I have tried 4 times over the past few years with no answer.

 6 
 on: Today at 02:47:50 AM 
Started by TheLurker - Last post by gvwezel
Hello im new here from holland but i read this topic its nice .
But why is there nobody using a tube ?
like they use in the P30 and the wakefield>

 7 
 on: Today at 02:37:25 AM 
Started by danmellor - Last post by Pete Fardell
You got me intrigued, Dan, as I didn’t know there was a big freeflight Luton Minor kit! A bit of frantic googling suggests it might be the 34” Flyline one?

 8 
 on: Today at 01:37:09 AM 
Started by RobtP - Last post by RobtP
Thanks Louis, found it! Interesting reading, particularly John Thompsons experience with his new build - he reduced downthrust to 5% and also mentions that the glide transition was a bit messy.  Now I wonder if he built the uplift on the stab leading edge, a little hard to tell from the photos.  Ron St Jean said in the letter published with Lee Hines' article that the rounded out entry was to reduce transition stall!

I haven't started reading the other New Clarions yet Smiley

BTW do you have a photo or sketch of your father's "Battle Axe" you could post or send me?  I would be very interested to see it.  NormF mentioned it had a fuselage built Starduster style, so high thrust line?

BillDenis - re your down thrust query, I don't know enough to explain this technically, but my understanding is that high power, low thrust line models (like the Ramrod) have a tendency to pitch up at launch, so if launch is VTO, without down thrust, the model may loop right over before gathering enough speed for wing incidence and stab to take effect.  Hand launching will not need as much down thrust if any at all and I don't think high thrust line designs like the Starduster need it. One of Ron St Jeans later designs, Show Off designed for ROW, had only 3° down thrust.  I built a Show Off in the 60's and would hand launch it at about 30° and it climbed just fine.  However Ron's build article for the design also said it would still VTO with 3° down thrust , so go figure!


 9 
 on: Today at 12:55:44 AM 
Started by Beazld - Last post by steveneill
I have a few of their engines inbound for testing and will report back with video and more in a later thread.

Josh got to test them recently and they are winners for sure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuJRydkJKlk&t=18s

 10 
 on: Today at 12:53:31 AM 
Started by steveneill - Last post by steveneill
Lincoln thanks. About as much as I got done today was the plans pinned to the building board and all the parts laid out.

That's another plane from this era I knew nothing about. Thanks for sharing.

I'm also planning a TA-183 FF build. I scratch built and EDF version for RC back in 2006 that flew quite well.

 11 
 on: Today at 12:30:03 AM 
Started by TheLurker - Last post by TheLurker
Quote from: OZPAF
> ...Other than taming the climb on tow by  moving the hook a bit further forward
> ... what may appear to be too far forward ..

OK. The hook is roughly 60 deg ahead of the experimentally determined CG, because of the skid, which I thought was pushing it a bit.  In fact I was considering mounting a hook on the skid at about the 30deg point, but in light of your comments will abandon that idea.  A very quick check (fuselage only) shows it is hanging from the hook almost exactly 15 deg. tail down, will try again after work with the wing in place.

Quote from: OZPAF
...dynamic stability may be a bit low ..
Hmm.  Not sure what I can do about that.  This version has more longitudinal dihedral than the original which was 0-0. Plan is now +2 and a bit on the wing and a similar amount negative on the stab.  Perhaps increase the chord on the stab by tacking some sheet to the TE or would that make it worse?

Quote from: OZPAF
If I'm correct about the dynamic effects on the stability than adding extra weight to the nose to stop the stall ...
That would tally with the sort of behaviour I was seeing last night.  Adding nose weight didn't reduce stall at all.

Quote from: JEM
I'm no expert on FF
And as should be blindingly obvious by now nor am I!

Quote from: JEM
...find it very entertaining..
Thank you, you've been a wonderful audience. I'm here all week and don't forget to tip the waitress.  Cheesy

 12 
 on: May 20, 2019, 11:21:41 PM 
Started by Don McLellan - Last post by Don McLellan
Hi John,

I'm tossing around printing a decal of the nose art, on clear decal paper, and placing it over the tissue.  If there isn't too much 'stretch' in the tissue it may add to the colour.  Maybe.  Also, as mentioned, this airplane was lost on it's first mission, and I haven't been able to find any pics etc, so, everything I've done is 'pie in the sky'.

As far as printed tissue goes, I want to move all the graphics up slightly, maybe 1/2" or so.  Right now the trailing edge of the wing root is grey rather than green, so did miss that, as well as a few other things.

D

 13 
 on: May 20, 2019, 10:49:38 PM 
Started by PaulR - Last post by Mike Thomas
Paul, glad you found a source. Mike.

 14 
 on: May 20, 2019, 10:14:59 PM 
Started by PaulR - Last post by PaulR
Thanks Mike, That was quick!

I have tried to contact Starlink-flightech and await a reply.  A lot of links to their sites come up with the dreaded "Error 404:  site not available" so I was wondering if they have gone out of business.

Regards,

paul.

Sorted, thanks Mike. SLFT is still trading and FAI Model Supplies also have them. Also Yuri Blazhevich, Stepan Stefanchuck and Gorban. No lack of sources!

Regards,

paul.

 15 
 on: May 20, 2019, 09:54:11 PM 
Started by Crabby - Last post by fred
IIRC.. Silver soldering required specific Silver Soldering flux.
 A liquid  paint on ..Is what I used with it.
 Regular flux simply didn't work.
 It charred and turned black under the higher heats of silver soldering.

 16 
 on: May 20, 2019, 09:45:45 PM 
Started by TheLurker - Last post by JEM
I'm no expert on FF and can't offer any worthwhile advice but I have been following this post since day 1 and find it very entertaining and interesting. Keep it up guys. Well done. Cheesy

 17 
 on: May 20, 2019, 09:18:50 PM 
Started by danmellor - Last post by danmellor
Yep; WAY bigger than the Aerographics!

Good spot on the subject, though...

Dan.

 18 
 on: May 20, 2019, 09:12:24 PM 
Started by danmellor - Last post by Indoorflyer
That's a nice start already!  Luton Minor, but not sure of the actual kit; Aerographics version isn't terribly large...

 19 
 on: May 20, 2019, 08:35:02 PM 
Started by danmellor - Last post by danmellor
Hi all! Despite my current awful work situation, I came back from this year's Indoor Nats fired up again. I've already started one KS possible for next year and just ordered the bits and pieces for another. One will be another big CO2 job and the other will be rubber. A lot of rubber. Maybe even two lots of rubber...!

Anyone else feel free to join in with their builds for next year. Here's my progress so far...


Cheers!


Dan.

P.S Brownie points if you can tell me what it is and what kit. As a bit of a clue; that tailplane is bigger than a peanut Lacey wing!

 20 
 on: May 20, 2019, 08:27:09 PM 
Started by DerekMc - Last post by OZPAF
Quote
there's nothing like the satisfaction of adding dead weight to the aft end of a chronically tail-heavy model...
Smiley

John

 21 
 on: May 20, 2019, 08:20:07 PM 
Started by Pete Fardell - Last post by danmellor
That was a massive shame, Pete! A well planned/documented/built model that should have had it's chance.

Hope you get it back together.

Dan.

 22 
 on: May 20, 2019, 08:16:49 PM 
Started by TheLurker - Last post by OZPAF
The glide looks quite reasonable and stable however it's dynamic stability may be a bit low with the long nose leading to inertia problems perhaps. Other than taming the climb on tow by  moving the hook a bit further forward and thus reducing the chance of releasing into a stall I'm not sure what I would do.

If I'm correct about the dynamic effects on the stability than adding extra weight to the nose to stop the stall may make the situation worse when it does stall.

The tow hook position could be a little deceptive due to the depth of the fuselage - what may appear to be too far forward could in effect be the correct position. I would suggest check the position relative to the cg by holding the model upside down from the hook  and see if it hangs around 15deg tail down.

John


 23 
 on: May 20, 2019, 08:01:18 PM 
Started by Don McLellan - Last post by OZPAF
Impressive Don - how else would you handle such tiny graphics?

John

 24 
 on: May 20, 2019, 07:52:41 PM 
Started by RobtP - Last post by duration
The British SAM club's newsletter "The New Clarion" has a article about the Ram Rod in the Dec 2015 issue. The article includes the first page of the 1956 MAN article, plans for the 250, and a chart showing the important dimensions of the various size versions. The article also includes info on building a Ram Rod some half century later.

Warning: Reading the New Clarion is addictive---you will be on the computer for hours.

To find it search "SAM 1066.org.  Then look for the archived New Clarion issues.

Louis

 25 
 on: May 20, 2019, 07:50:25 PM 
Started by Crabby - Last post by VictorY
I've had good luck with 60-40 rosin core solder, no flux, and low temps. Use only enough heat to melt the solder. This is harder to do with a torch but still possible. Clean the oxidation off of the parts and  wrap the joints in fine strands of copper wire that's just had the insulation stripped off, like motor wire or battery wire. The copper wire will hold the parts together during soldering, and create a much stronger joint that will prevent the solder from fracturing under extreme stress, like the fibers in fiberglass. It also seems to help get the bonding process started, kind of like a mechanical flux!?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!